On Iraq, the US, oil and war

[pkb]

Re: I don\'t remember

Read my post!

I didn't say that we went to war with the USSR - in fact I made exactly the opposite point that the West won the Cold War without having to go to all-out war. We did however exist in an incredibly high state of tension with all of our strategic military assets on virtually permanent alert status - ie nuclear bombers prowling just outside Soviet airspace, our nuclear subs shadowing their missile boats etc etc.

The ability of capitalism to fund both guns and butter is what tipped the Soviets over the edge. They could afford one - barely - and certainly not both. In the end the good guys won. The combination of western capitalism and democracy may not be perfect but it is as good a system as anyone has yet devised. I think that last comment actually reflects something Churchill once said.

Peter

 

[tcm]

Re: another lesson

good stuff.

I feel that many are involving themselve in the discussion. A far cry from politics being irrelevant. BUT.. note how irrelevant one's thoughts would be with a common EU defence policy. Who exactly do you vote for or against at a later date?

 

[Observer]

So what\'s your point?

Is it:

"the US's agenda includes securing the future availability of Iraqi oil?" Quite possibly - but so what?. Everbody would benefit from that, not least the Iraqi people, who have been denied the benefits of the mineral wealth tied up in the oilfields. Saddam can still choose to capitulate to the will of the UN - in which case war will be avoided - and remain in power. In due course, UN sanctions and embargoes would be lifted and the oil could be traded on international markets. There would still be some doubt about whether the Iraqi people will see much of the benefit, but the justification for the use of force, and the threat of force, would be removed.

 

[Twister_Ken]

So it\'s OK to use force...

...to secure the oil you need?

Because that's what's going to happen. This has got naff all to do with Weapons of Mass Destruction, terrorism, the human rights of the Iraqi people or the fact that Saddan Hussein is an extremely disagreeable fellow.

It's all about an oil hungry country, run by a bunch of rapacious oilmen, which is running out of indigenous oil, wanting to secure its future supplies by invasion. And pity the poor sods who get in the way.

I know Nigel or CC may come back and say the US can get all the oil it wants from the ex-USSR, but they would be the commercial customers of that oil and blackmailable in the same way that OPEC has behaved in the past. In Iraq, they will be the controllers (either directly or by proxy) as well as the customers.

 

[Bergman]

Re: I don\'t remember

I did!

The essential point that you somehow seem to have missed is that rather than maintaining pressure SHORT of actual war as we and the US did in cold war, what is proposed now is actual war. You know bombs, tanks, things that go bang and kill people.

The whole part of the debate I entered into was that I was all in favour of pressure short of war but opposed to going in and invading the place.

Actually I worry less about the war, which doubtless the US will win relatively quickly and (hopefully) with few casualties, but the "peace" that is meant to follow it.

I have seen no sign that Bush has any idea of what will happen afterwards, and no sign that any policy for the Middle East has been thought through.

 

[Twister_Ken]

Hmm!

>the US will win relatively quickly and (hopefully) with few casualties<

On the 'free world' side at least. Having heard the military discussing their 'raghead' scores last time around, I'm glad I'm not in Iraq now.

 

[Bergman]

Re: Me too

Rather that no-one gets killed, but if thats not possible better "theirs" than "ours"

I do wish the US would give others a little more respect. I remember what the "Gooks" did to them in Vietnam.

Terms like "raghead score" does them no credit, particularly for a society that regards itself as free of racism.

 

[hlb]

Re: Me too

I've not alot of time for the Americans. Then again I've not alot of time for the British And i'm one of them.. Have spent a bit of time in Irak. Not got alot going for them over there. Dont blame them to much at having a go at the Americans. Lets get rid of them.!!!

<font color=blue> Haydn

 

[PeterGibbs]

Re: another lesson indeed!

Nobody's taking bets against the USA invasion of Iraq -so time to consider it a fait accompli and move on!

I picture to myself a day, perhaps too soon, when the UK is part of the Euro and majority voting has been forced on us for all matters in what is then clearly a federated Europe.

Who sets our foreign policy then? What betting our leaders have found "being at the heart of Europe" a delusion, that the Franco-German axis has managed to impose itself on us for all time. That the only way we can achieve influence in this axis of external neutrality, founded on the bureaucratic management of economic socialist stagation, is to openly distance ourselves from the USA, to "right the wrong" that de Gaulle perceived in our makeup. Shall we then feel we have done the right thing for our country? Will we have made the right allignment? Or shall we then be forced to take what I call "the Belgian view" -ie. let the big egoes get on with it, we will concentrate on counting our truffels?

But as optimist I am convinced the sleepwalkers in our midst will come to. Madmen will be taken in hand, security will be improved, the links with the new Europe / the USA will be strengthened, and the UK will steer clear of the miasma that is Franco- German politics. And there will be no more sniping talk of the USA sending 200,000 troops to Iraq to gain control of oil that it could so easily obtain just by dumping the dictator-controlled UN, and its sanctions on Iraq.


PWG

 

[Hardley]

This proposed war is all about pay back time for the backers of Bushe's election? the oil people.
What will hapen in the Middle East after the war?
More people lining up against the Western World.
I came to the conclusion, 50 years ago, that you can never win in the long run, when you are up against people who are not afraid of dying.
The only solution is to talk to these people and insure that the oil revenue is used to improve their standard of living and support a safe state for Palastine .